Skip to main content

About your Search

20130201
20130228
Search Results 0 to 21 of about 22
nuclear weapons would signal reduced commitment to european security and embolden russia, who would seek to make use of that. if there were any such weakening of resolve, it would create instability, perhaps a crisis of confidence in europe, and potentially lead to more nuclear percolation. i outlined this in his first introductory. just to highlight whether this is true. there are questions in here. secondly, there is a question about whether deterrence are different in any way compare to those over here. and doesn't matter. there is also a question about what is driving this. are there increasing divisions between european and their attitudes towards russia? those are my questions. it is the american information security council, and we engage in discussions like this around nuclear disarmament and nonproliferation. but i'm going to introduce to you first dub brown, more formally lord browne, who is the secretary of defense around 2006 until 2009. he is also part of the european leadership network. we are talking about nuclear deterrence. i'm not. >> thank you very much. thank you for
the major powers, china has a key role to play here. japan, would like to see russia for a more helpful. obviously, the united nations, security council still has a role to play in many issues as it celebrates its next set of actions. but we have to, together, find a way to make sure that the kim family regime doesn't feel invulnerable when it improves its march towards a nuclearized icbm. when it improves its capabilities through provocations to the region. we need, in other words, an offense not just a defense. to put it in a different way. we have to shift from what has been defensive containment that's been very leaky because of cooperation with iran proliferation off the peninsula with the fact we have not stopped this long march to a capability, to an offensive containment strategy where the united states, especially its key allies, south korea and japan, augment in the first instance, a defensive posture, through improved and more integrated intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance through ballistic missile capability, through a readiness to deal with provocations across the
acting as they have with regard to china, to russia, to iran and north korea, the united states, the discussion has been rather precise. i'd like to expand the breadth and perhaps the depth of the questions in this discussion to include two organizations that i think play a role in this. one is the shanghai cooperation organization led by china which both india and iran are, observer, observer attendees at the meetings and at their meetings they have come up with policies and responsibilities assigned to the member nations with regard to the future of afghanistan and some other issues. the second is the collective security treaty organization, a military counterpart to nato and russia's lead role in that. i think that if you consider these organizations the question arises, why do we have so much trouble figuring out china's motivations and russia's motivations, what are behind their stratdpigs -- strategies because russia and china respectively could in these two organizations lead from behind. and have other member organizations affect outcomes of such talks as the six-party t
with russia in unison through reciprocal presidential directives, negotiated in another round of bilateral arms reduction talks, or implemented unilaterally. it goes on, this unusual statement quote, security is mainly a state of mind, not a physical condition, and mutual assured destruction no longer occupies a central psychological or political space in the u.s., russian relationship. i don't think that's true where russia is. further on, that was on page one of the report. then it says this about bilateral and nuclear arms negotiations on page 16. >> would you forgive the interruption? i think i'm able to set a time for a vote now if we can get some idea about how long you want to speak him and i'm not trying to limit you. can you give us an idea about how long? i just talked to senator blumenthal and i want to ask senator hirono the same question. >> i just want to share a few thoughts spent know, is five minutes enough? >> seven. >> that's no problem. senatosenator hirono, how long t you speak? senator blumenthal? i'm now going to schedule a vote for 5:00. you about at five. we will h
russia won't allow americans to adopt anymore. plus, your e-mails, phone calls, and tweets. "washington journal" is live at 7:00 a.m. eastern on c-span. on tuesday, the american enterprise institute hosted a panel of scholars to preview president obama's upcoming state of the union address and how foreign policy and national security will be addressed in the president's second term. this is one hour and 20 minutes. >> good afternoon, folks. [inaudible conversations] >> good afternoon, folks. can i please get everybody to sit down and speak quietly? i think we are going to start here. good afternoon, everybody. i am danielle pletka. i am from the american enterprise institute. welcome to our first an annual series of state of the union policy event. every year, aei scholars come together and answer questions that have been raised or are likely to come up. we try to look forward a little bit and think about what the right answers are to the questions that are being posed. it is one of the few events that we do with only aei scholars, although i am very happy to be together with them. i wi
like russia and india who are playing a very interesting role in the evolving diplomacy over iran. so, tom, welcome. >> thank you, tamara. and along with tom, of course, we have our own kenneth pollack, senior fellow in the saban center, and ken is finishing a book right now on the challenge of iran which you will be able to look for in bookstores later this year. so we're very happy to have ken with us to provide some comments on this topic as well. what we'll do is have a little bit of a conversation up here, and then we'll open it up for questions from the floor, and why don't we jump right in with, with some of these recent developments. there's now a date set for the next round of international negotiations to be held inial matty, that distinguished diplomatic capital. one wonders if perhaps that quieter location will allow a little bit of distance from the glare of the cameras. do you expect much progress? what do you expect from these long-delayed, long-awaited talks? >> thanks, tamara, very much. it's a pleasure to be with you all. i can't think of a more wonderful crowd to br
and feeding it back to asia or russia or whoever's controlling. >> host: you point out the executive order signed by the president, one of the first pieces of business in the state of the union address. what did he put in place and how will that prevent this from happening in the future? >> guest: what the president is trying to share information between the government and intelligence agencies that can collect information and the seize malware coming in and they see hackers coming and. what companies they believe are targeted by them. >> hostthem. that's one piece. i want to establish a set that their voluntary standards, what practices to protect their information from backing. what they call basic hygiene which is change your password, things like that. update your software, just the basics host the how often do people getting into who think it's personal, open it up and then create problems? >> guest: that's one thing, how easy it is for chinese hackers to pretty basic simple trick to get somebody to install your malware on their computer. you say hey, joe, i know we were talking about
we're going to do away with tears because they may know china and russia and north korea and iran are all going to do away with the capabilities. so that's one of the objections i have two chuck hagel, his nomination. >> host: u.s.a. to the papers he would reach a filibuster against his nomination. it looks according to the "baltimore sun" that all circuits are democrats and two of your colleagues are also going to support his nomination. in in fact it can be 60. >> guest: let me correct your first spirit are not filibustering. i have to do is demand a 60-vote margin. i'm doing that. in fact, almost all controversial appointments. cabinet level appointments end up with a 60-vote margin. yeah, you may be right. they may be right there and if so you'll see people change their votes so they can be in the prevailing side. that is something quite common. but the problems i have with him, let's keep in mind coming yesterday we had a vote. everyone of the republicans voted against his confirmation and the reason is that very partially from what we just not talked about, the partially wit
really be displaced diplomatically given russia's strong support military and in other words for the regime. >> andrea, i'll let your first question, and i'll let the secretary answer questions, two, three, and four. [laughter] i will -- why should they come and meet? they should come and meet because in fact, countries have been helping them, and because we are precisely meeting to determine how to help president asad change the calculation on the ground. i said that priestly in the united states that president assad needs to be able to change his calculation. and president obama has been engaged in examining exactly in what ways we may be able to contribute to that. that's the purpose of this meeting in rome. so i would urge the syrian opposition to join us as a matter of practicality and of informing us. but i would say to them ahead of time that in our discussions here today, our discussions in washington, which prompted us to accept this meeting with a new secretary of state at the beginning moment of the second term of president obama, when he himself has expressed conc
that russia and china will not come aboard, and as long as either stays within the system, stasis is the politician. it's a way of rigging things. if we believe, if we come to the determination under either the president or us here or anyone who cares about this. if you come to the determination that the objective, the three objectives i listed before are worthy and necessary objectives so you have justified ends and you discover that the u.n. is precisely the antithesis of any meaningful means to accomplish this. it's clear to me staying within the united nations framework is a formula for doing nothing. putin has been given a veto over the foreign policy and given it gladly. it unburdens the administration of the challenge of having to face the problem directly. it's been going on for 11 points. -- twenty two months. it putin is not going to relet. we know about him. he believes in the heavy foot prints not the light. my view is it was long time to go outside the u.n. and the united states should find the allies and we should find them and work to accomplish the objective there.
, the grandson of poor immigrants who fled czarist russia come here, and that grandson became the majority leader of our house of representatives. that's what this country is about. [applause] >> you know, in kitty hawk, north carolina, to bicycle shop mechanics gave mankind the gift of flight. the wright brothers flew only 22 feet at that time, 18 feet in the air, but they perform a miracle. as a result, only 66 years later, this country put a man on the moon and brought him back. that's who we are. we can get an enormous amount as a people. the wright brothers father, milton, actually inspired his sons by giving them a toy helicopter. he never ever wanted his two sons, orville and wilbur, to fly together for fear that he would lose them. and seven years after the original flight, so in 1910, milton gave them the permission to fly together. the only time they ever did, and it lasted six minutes. now, later that day, orville took his 82 year old father up into the air. it lasted seven minutes, rising 350 feet at that time. while milton shouted, higher, orville, higher. now, i think it's a great t
, period. you don't see china, russia going all over the world, you know, being the world's policemen. it's time we stop. >> host: okay, and we increase spending that way? >> caller: yes. it's time we embraced sanity instead of insanity. >> host: all right. june in norfolk, virginia, a republican caller. hi, june. >> caller: hi. we've got to get rid of these taxes. this is just too much. we gave in already once. we've give in several times -- we've given in several times. we've got to stop the spending. it's, we are, you know, we've got, we've got socialistic governments all over the world. if that's what you want, please, get on a plane and go there and live. >> host: so, june -- >> caller: we have got to get our country under control. >> host: so, june, do you think republicans should hold that line and let sequestration happen if they, if democrats will not agree to spending cuts? >> caller: well, they're not going to agree to spending cuts. they have all of the press, and it is spun every day. we hear nothing on the media about the fact that we are taxed too much. >> host: okay. >> ca
of the last century, my grandparents fled the vicious anti-semitic programs of the stars of russia to come to america. widowed at a young age, my grandmother raised her two sons in a tiny apartment atop a grocery store that she and my grandfather had opened in downtown richmond. with little butter faith, thrift and hope for a better tomorrow, my grandma worked seven days a week to ensure that my dad and my uncle could realize the promise of this great country. and today, my children and i stand as proof of the possibility to what may have seemed to her then like an impossible dream. to uphold his legacy of those who have come before us, washington will need to make choices. and in a divided government, these choices are often tough. we in the house of majority remain committed to making those tough choices and stand ready to lead with this president. higher, milton wright once shouted from the air. higher. making life work for more working people, and also want to work is the best way to a future of higher growth and more opportunity. thank you very much. [applause] >> questions? yes, sir.
in mozambique and leaving 150,000 homeless. parts of russia have warmed between 3.5 degrees and 5.5 degrees farenheit in the last century, leading to the loss of permafrost. russians, like alaskans, who i spoke about before, build homes and roads and infrastructure on the permafrost. when it disappears, communities lose the very foundations on which they are built. noaa says the russian heat wave of 2010, which killed tens of thousands of people, was the most severe since records were first kept back in 1880. and this type of heat wave is now more and more likely. go to the land down under where warmer and more acidic oceans have fueled a widespread coral bleaching in the great barrier reef. the great barrier reef is a natural wonder. it is one of the great wonders of the world. and economically, it's the basis of a $4 billion tourism industry in australia. and it is dying before our eyes. scientists say that climate change heightens the devastation from other natural disasters in australia, like the 2009 bush fires that claimed 173 lives, the 2011 flooding that killed dozens, and the wildf
of state, ambassador to israel and russia; frank women of sner, former under secretary of defense for policy and ambassador to egypt and to india. mr. president, senator hagel's nomination has been supported by the major groups of american veterans, including the veterans of foreign wars, the iraq and afghanistan veterans of america, amvets, vietnam veterans of america, and the american legion. he has received support from military officers association of america, foreign area officers association, and the noncommissioned officers acomes ssociation. -- association. senator hagel has been endorsed by numerous newspapers, including "usa today" situated that many -- which stated that many of the supposed weaknesses that republican senators hammered him on are actually proof that hagel takes thoughtful positions, doesn't bend easily to pressure. i'd like to read just a few quotes from those organizations of veterans. veterans -- that have endorsed him. veterans of foreign wars says the following: "it is not the place for america's oldest and largest combat veterans organization to adv
china, russia and some of the mideast countries want to have more government involvement in the development of the internet. the u.s.-led involvement in the internet, they're concerned about the multi-stakeholder private-sector governance of the internet which i think has led to the internet's wonders of the great development of that and i'm very much on the side of the united states on this. and by the way this is one area in which the republicans or democrats, this is the one area that they can easily agree on. now on the other hand some republicans point to exactly the point that you make and that is there is some hypocrisy here. we are saying hey wait a minute we want a free network that on the other hand we want rules like network neutrality here domestically and we won't want to have the government involved in the international sphere. i think on the other hand some folks who support the network neutrality rules would say there is quite a difference between those two instances and that would not be a fair comparison. i probably am on the side of the import to your q
, at the border to russia, we have the team of soldiers sleeping in the same rooms as their male colleagues all year round. in my battalion in norway, i didn't want this, and we separated, and the reason for this is that when deployed, there is a no alcohol, we don't have all these issues going out, but the combination with alcohol, young women and men together, that's not always easy. when they came home from, i think, the few harassment issues we've had, they were always combinedded with alcohol, and, therefore, i was a little concerned to have them sleeping in the same room, not about ability to lock their doors and so on. it's sad to tell, but that's the truth. >> do you have something to say? >> i did. the critical mass thing put me on alert since i've been listening to that. particularly, after i saw the article in "usa today" yesterday talking about general amos talking about what he thinks it means. i don't think they know what they mean by the term "critical mass" and having been on staff duty a lot and seeing the compromises that have had to be made to come to accord. i'm thinking tha
themselves and the rest of the world. russia, china, almost the whole world, and as a result of that, it should be a great concern to the international community that they are continuing to develop their capabilities when not only to south korea but to the rest of the world coming and for that reason i think that we have to take steps. >> can you describe in any way the factions or steps as you put it that you are contemplating taking? >> it is a combination of a number of things. one is the diplomatic steps that have to be taken. i think the security council, bringing the security council together is important to organize the international community to do that. i believe that this morning i talked with the defense minister of south korea and we both agreed that we ought to make sure that we make clear we are going to continue to conduct exercises and continue to deploy the force is in that area. .. what can you tell us now that we don't know about the operations? who -- you know, the one thing that maybe you -- >> it wasn't james gandolfini who did that, i just want you to -- >> y
know, russia and iran have provided help. that's wrong. that's only adding to the problems and giving strength to a person who has turned on his own people. but then we need to coordinate our attentions so that we can provide the help they need and the confidence they're looking to so that they will have the necessary training not only to reclaim their country but then to rule their country in a democratic way that respects the rights of all the citizens. as the chair of the helsinki commission i pointed that out to the syrian opposition, that we want to provide the help so that they can rule their country one day. we hope sooner rather than later. in a way that respects the rights of all of its citizens, provides economic opportunity foreits -- for its citizens. that's the only you'll have a nation that respects the security of its country. that was the message we delivered and i hope that the united states will join other countries in a more concerted effort to get assad out of syria. as i said, i think he should be at the hague and held accountable for his war crimes and held accou
countries -- russia, singapore, australia, brazil, chile, canada and the united kingdom. i recently shared what canada was doing to attract more entrepreneurs and today i'd like to share what's happening in the united kingdom and explain why it's in our country's best interest to act quickly to retain highly skilled and entrepreneurial immigrants. much like the united states, the u.k. has a range of visa categories for immigrants with varying skills and financial resources. but in 2011, the u.k. government made changes to simplify their visa rules in order to attract more talented entrepreneurs to their country. the u.k. recently created an entirely new type of visa for what they call perspective entrepreneurs. these individuals are allowed to enter the u.k. for a set period of time to secure funding and to start the process of setting up their businesses before they begin the traditional visa process. raising capital can be one of the more challenging aspects of starting a new business, and this visa gives entrepreneurs a running start. the u.k. has also changed its top visa category, tie
china, india, brazil, russia , europe, and therefore the north american countries including canada. we could develop the view to make sure the productivity is up of the labor force is used. when those is integrating the labor markets. >> i would point* out relative to the question there is no freedom of movement inherent in naphtha but the visas sort i'd like hb-1 visas very easy movement with canadians the east of constant movement many if not more mexicans come through with their hb-1 visas how do evaluate that? is airways nafta was a success first or a short period of time to displaced by china in that regard but did it create pressures to keep mexicans home? no. not really. to some extent we will never know but certainly it did not but in 1988 agriculture wooded trigger those such shortages of agriculture consider we have 150,000 temporary migrants coming every year that is half of the net flow from the 1990's on the authorized basis of that is why people argue these large programs have substituted out what we have seen from prior decades at least 120 of these with the visas also t
done that in the past are germany under adolf hitler, russia under joseph stalin and china which led to some of the biggest amounts of mass murder in the entire 20th century so we should keep in mind the other stuff during the debate that the initial reason we had the right to bear arms was to prevent tyranny and government just to make sure that isn't lost among the emotional issue. >> host: thanks for the call. >> guest: i think she certainly the shooting wasn't a gun-free zone and in las vegas yesterday it wasn't. it doesn't only happen in gun-free zones, it happens frankly everywhere. unfortunately, the conversation that we are talking about, background checks for example, making sure those are done on everybody is extrapolated to this degree that ultimately this will somehow result in people getting their door open and having someone take their guns which is in the conversation at all it's not what any of these bills or this legislation would do. it's frankly unconstitutional to do that. we have the decision that you cannot ban guns and i think that is a great decision for us be
Search Results 0 to 21 of about 22